Greetings, and welcome to the ArcBest Second Quarter 2019 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded Wednesday, July 31, 2019. I would now like to turn the conference over to David Humphrey, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Welcome to the ArcBest Second Quarter 2019 Earnings Conference Call. A presentation this morning will be done by Judy McReynolds, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of ArcBest; and David Cobb, Chief Financial Officer of ArcBest. Today, following Judy and David's opening remarks about the second quarter results, I will conduct a question-and-answer period with them by reading submitted questions that we received last night following our earnings release. We appreciate the questions that we received. We will try to answer as many as we can during the remainder of this call. We thank you for joining us today. In order to help you better understand ArcBest and its results, some forward-looking statements could be made during this call. As we all know, forward-looking statements by their very nature are subject to uncertainties and risks. For a more complete discussion of factors that could affect the company's future results, please refer to the forward-looking statements section of the company's earnings press release and the company's most recent SEC public filing. In order to provide meaningful comparisons, certain information discussed in this conference call includes non-GAAP financial measures as measured and described in the tables in our earnings press release. We will now begin with Judy.

Thank you, David, and good morning, everyone. We were pleased to report another positive quarter, one that was quite solid in historical terms, but obviously experienced some moderation from last year's record-setting pace. Throughout the quarter, we saw that some areas of the economy remained strong while others were more volatile, leading to a mixed outlook among our customers and some basis for caution. But generally, the environment was positive. We have been tracking the rising trend in inventory-to-sales ratio this year, and also note that there is some ongoing concern on the tariff front, while industrial production and manufacturing levels were sequentially soft. All of this, obviously, impacts demand for logistics services. Overall, however, we are encouraged by the fact that our customers increasingly seek advice and expertise from us about their complex supply chain challenges. Given the expanded and substantial market opportunities available to us, which you've heard me talk about in the past, I am confident we are headed in the right direction. We have a lot of room to grow. In fact, internal research we recently updated shows us that nearly 8 out of 10 current ArcBest customers have a need for more than one of our logistics services, up from previously indicated levels. Our growth strategy is directly aligned with these findings and provides a clear pathway forward regardless of the operating environment. The investments we have made and continue to make in people, processes and technology, are enabling greater knowledge, visibility and success with customers. Our people now have more and better information to have meaningful conversations with decision-makers responsible for transportation and logistics spend. Specifically regarding our service offerings in the quarter, our Asset-Based business once again benefited from rational pricing environment despite lower shipment levels. The baseline reset we undertook with our…

Thank you, Judy, and good morning, everyone. Let me begin with some consolidated information. Second quarter 2019 consolidated revenues were $771 million compared to $793 million from last year's second quarter, a per day decrease of 2%. On a GAAP basis, we had second quarter 2019 net income of $0.92 per diluted share compared to $0.05 per share last year. You will recall that last year's second quarter figure included the impact of our withdrawal from the New England multi-employer pension plan. As detailed in the GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliation table in yesterday afternoon's earnings press release, adjusted second quarter 2019 net income, $0.93 per diluted share compared to $1.12 per share in the same period last year. We ended the second quarter with unrestricted cash and short-term investments of $299 million. Combined with the available resources under our credit revolver in our receivable securitization agreement, our total liquidity currently equals $500 million. Our total debt at the end of the second quarter of 2019 of $282 million includes the $70 million balance of our credit revolver, the $40 million borrowed on our receivables securitization and $172 million of notes payable primarily on equipment for Asset-Based operation. Deposit interest rate on all of our debt was 3.4%. During the second quarter, we continued to take actions to enhance shareholder value that included the payment of $0.08 per share quarterly cash dividend and our purchase of over 94,000 shares of our stock for a total price of $2.5 million. Under our existing repurchase program, we have approximately $17 million repurchase availability remaining. The full details of our GAAP cash flow are included in our earnings press release. Asset-Based second quarter revenue was $560 million, a per day increase of 1% compared to last year. Asset-Based quarterly total tonnage per day decreased…

Thanks, David. Now for the quarterly company highlights. In May, we were pleased to announce that ArcBest had once again moved up on the Fortune 1000 list to number 745. Since 2013, we have moved up from #927, an accomplishment we are proud of and that derives from our ability to provide full logistics solutions. In June, ABF recognized 5 service centers with the President's Quality Award for achievements in 2018. Those locations were Dothan, Alabama; Portland, Oregon; Norristown, Pennsylvania; Dayton, Ohio; and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Congratulations again to all of the dedicated people in these services who respond to our customers' needs in exceptional ways. Also in June, we announced the launch of Retail+, an innovative compliance solution for vendors to help them better meet large retailers' stringent shipping and delivery requirements. This solution, combining process enhancements with improved software, is a great example of the collaboration we have with customers, where we listen to their needs and co-create solutions that fit the times and the environment we're all operating within. We have had great feedback to date from Retail+, in one case enabling a customer to report saving $250,000 in just 1 quarter in charge-back penalties from unmet requirements. We are now seeing some customers generally outperforming industry compliance standards by 25%. It's been interesting to us to see that this solution is also resonating somewhat higher up in our customers' organization. For example, at the CFO level, as decision-makers seek out every opportunity to create efficiencies in their supply chain spending. And now I'll talk a little bit about the rest of the year. Last quarter, we talked about the loosened capacity we were seeing in truckload, and that certainly gained momentum in the second quarter. General expectations are for that to continue. Although, we will monitor for any tightening that may occur and adjust accordingly. We're also keeping an eye on labor costs in the Asset-Based network, while making sure that we provide the service levels our customers expect. As I mentioned earlier, the overall environment remains positive. But in any environment, because of the broad sources of capacity we have available for our customers in both Asset-Based and Asset-Light modes, we're in a good place when it comes to meeting customer needs for full supply chain solutions. Our people are more proactive in their ability to provide expert advice on all aspects of the supply chain spectrum, leading to better results for customers and for us. And finally, I will conclude by noting that we are pushing ahead with process and technology initiatives to improve our operations and ensure greater visibility so that account managers are able to capture more business and grow our company. These investments that David Cobb mentioned are ongoing and expected to provide future benefits. I'll now turn it over to David Humphrey to conduct our question-and-answer session.

Okay. Thank you, Judy. To begin, we had similar questions from Chris Wetherbee of Citi, Todd Fowler of KeyBanc and Matt Brooklier of Buckingham, asking: within the Asset-Based business, can you talk about the dynamic between the LTL-rated and the truckload-rated freight in July? Please provide some color specifically around the increase in TL-rated spot shipments. Is this a function of prior year comparisons or a strategic initiative to handle more truckload-rated freight? They also ask about the June tonnage decline and what has been the trend so far in July? How does July tonnage compare to normal seasonality? Judy, do you want to take that one?

Sure. Those are a number of good questions. And I'll start with the dynamic between LTL-rated and the truckload-rated freight. As I mentioned earlier, we experienced a reversal of what we had seen in recent quarters, and our LTL-rated shipment did decline versus last year's second quarter and we increased the number of truckload-rated shipments moving in our Asset-Based network. We experienced a high single-digit year-over-year decline in LTL-rated shipments in the month of June and that continued in July. So in order to fill the empty capacity that we have available, we attracted a greater number of truckload-rated shipments and those helped us balance our network and they reduced linehaul costs. And this compares to the period in 2018, where we were experiencing tighter capacity, and we were very focused on serving our LTL customers' needs. With respect to the sequential trends, both the LTL- and truckload-rated shipments are -- the trends for those are in line with historical June to July comparisons.

Okay. Chris, Jack Atkins of Stephens and Ravi Shanker of Morgan Stanley also ask about Asset-Based spot shipments. Increased truckload-rated spot shipments throughout the quarter seem to have continued into July. Can you tell us what's driving this trend? How would you expect the divergence in LTL- and truckload-rated growth rates to impact the Asset-Based operating ratio? Is truckload freight profitable in the network as -- is it as profitable in the network as LTL freight? And also regarding weight per shipment, the press release referenced that this was driven by the growth in truckload-rated shipments. Do you see weight per shipment turning positive in the second half of the year?

Okay. David, since we talked about the dynamic between the LTL-rated and the truckload-rated freight already, I want to remind everybody about the important work that we've been doing in 2017 and 2018 to improve LTL yield and the fact that, that puts us in a much better place in terms of the profitability of our overall account base. We're still experiencing good rate increases on our LTL business. And as we said yesterday in the 8-K, our LTL billed revenue per hundredweight, excluding fuel surcharge, increased in the high single digits. Truckload-rated, non-U-Pack business in general isn't as profitable as the LTL business. However, it can be in certain lanes as it really helps us balance the network and lowers our linehaul costs. But the profit level associated with these truckload-rated, non-U-Pack business shipment is really in line with longer-term historical averages, with the exception of what we experienced last year. And regarding the outlook for weight per shipment for the rest of the year, it's really difficult for us to know for sure as that will be influenced by the change in mix between LTL and truckload-rated business, and whether the recent trend of accelerated truckload growth continues in our Asset-Based business.

Can you talk generally about the LTL pricing environment? Was LTL freight rates declining in early third quarter? Has there been any change in your ability to capture pricing? On this topic, Dave Ross of Stifel ask whether the LTL pricing environment was good enough to allow us to cover cost increases. David, do you want to take that one?

Yes, David. Yes, thank you. I'll start with, as Judy mentioned earlier, in our view the LTL pricing environment remains rational. And as Judy just mentioned again, the increase in the billed revenue per hundredweight, excluding the fuel surcharge, on the Asset-Based LTL-rated freight was in the high single digits in the second quarter and into July. So we believe these price increases were adequate when you consider our major cost elements. However, the changing profile of our business with lower LTL weight per shipment does make it more difficult to align costs with revenue levels, as labor is typically managed to the shipment levels. But I do want to also point out that as we enter the third quarter, we are facing tougher comps as our third quarter 2018 total billed revenue per hundredweight increased 10.1% versus the third quarter of 2017.

Okay. Ravi asked about the fears raised last quarter regarding LTL pricing getting more aggressive. How has pricing been trending overall? How much pressure is being exerted by 3PLs, and are new entrants being particularly aggressive in any particular areas? Judy?

David, I think Ravi's question about the fears raised last quarter have really been addressed in our comments so far. We really believe the LTL pricing environment is rational. And so what I'll do is I'll move on to address his other questions. You can always find anecdotal stories about price aggression. We haven't seen a consistent pattern of aggression by any competitor, whether that competitor is really a carrier or a 3PL. What we have seen are some nonincumbents be competitive on new business, but that's really not unusual in any environment. We're always seeing that as the months go by. So...

Okay. Similarly, Chris, Matt and Jack asked related pricing questions. How does July LTL pricing compare to the second quarter 3.1% increase of customer contract renewals? Are you seeing any signs of competitive pricing in any lanes or regions throughout the network? David?

Yes. I would say, referring to the customer contract renewals, although that increase of 3.1% that we had in the second quarter was less than what we've earned in the last couple of quarters, we're still seeing solid pricing from across the broader customer base, as we've been talking about. And as we've mentioned, we would characterize the environment -- pricing environment as rational. As we continue to price business for the value we bring, our most recent information indicates that we are maintaining market share.

Okay. Second quarter OR improved at a rate below normal seasonality. Can you describe the puts and takes there? How should we think about the cadence of OR looking forward? I think on that one, we'd say that our Asset-Based results were impacted by our technology and innovations investments and some of the elements of our union contract. The 8-K supplement that we released yesterday afternoon with our earnings release provides more detail on the various cost impact on the quarter's results. As well as factors to consider going forward into the third quarter. I also want to mention that we did have a few other questions that were dressed in the 8-K, so I would direct you to the additional information that we provided there. We also received a couple of requests for information that we don't normally provide. Moving on now, next, Chris and Jack asked about the other and eliminations line. This serves as a tailwind versus previous quarters, and was better than your initial expectations. Can you provide more detail around what drove this? Was low tax spending a factor?

David, I'll take that. The costs in our other segment were below the initial projections due to some lower incentive levels and management of operating cost, along with the movement in the business levels as we expected there. So we have seen -- we've also had some lower tax spending within the other segment, but that was probably more related to the timing of those initiatives.

All right. Did you record for the annual union profit-sharing bonus in the second quarter. If so, how much did you record?

David, let me take that again. In the 8-K we released yesterday afternoon with our earnings release, we provided some additional details and information on how this mechanism will work. And I would reiterate some of that information, starting with that the payout could be from 1% to 3% of annual earnings for qualifying union employees. And in estimating that impact, remember to understand that 1% of ABF Freight's annual union employee earnings would equal approximately $5 million to $6 million of bonus -- of union bonus expense. But we internally project a payout of this bonus, we would accrue for that expected annual expense throughout the year and it will be included in our quarterly results. However, as you all know, we don't provide public updates on our projected operating ratio, and so we won't be commenting on our expectations for paying the union bonus. However, if your financial models reflect an operating ratio that meets the bonus payout ratio, then we would encourage you to include expenses for the union bonus in your quarterly and annual earnings projections of our company. And just as a reminder, our Asset-Based operating ratio in the first half of the year was 95.3%.

Okay. We had a couple of questions about management of Asset-Light costs. Within Asset-Light, are there cost measures that can be employed to help offset the decline in net revenues highlighted in the 8-K for July? Also given a decline in the results of the Asset-Light segment year-over-year, why were costs flexing down more aggressively in response? Are there steps that you can take to reduce SG&A expenses in particular in this business to help offset the ongoing capacity investments. Judy?

Well, these are all good questions about our Asset-Light business and the strategy that we're deploying. So let's start with some of the actions that we're taking. And the fact that then -- so as we're, I guess, late in the second quarter and early into the third quarter as we're looking at things, we're seeing productivity improve. And productivity is measured by shipments per employee per day, and that's within our carrier- and our customer-facing role. This productivity improvement is really driven by investments that we've made in technology and some staffing reductions that we've made. But we do continue to make investments in technology and capacity, which are focused on improving service and the overall customer experience, which again should allow us to grow. But a significant portion of our capacity investment is also tied to improving safety and claims experience, which again would be targeting better performance in our cost. But our primary focus is on growth and retention strategies with new and existing customers. And our research shows 8 out of 10 customers need 2 or more of our solutions, and we're very focused on that opportunity. So a large portion of our Asset-Light cost structure is fixed because of our expectations that we can grow within our customer base and the overall market. So as we're growing, we should see that improvement really in the bottom line.

Okay. All right. Next, Matt asked, what was the second quarter '19 year-over-year change in final-mile volumes, specifically residential non-U-Pack shipments? What are management's expectations for the second half of 2019?

David, I'll take that. And I appreciate the questions about the service lines. We've served customers in the residential pickups and deliveries for over 20 years with our products that we have there. And as a result, we have solutions and technology to meet the stringent shipper requirements for these. But in the second quarter, I'd just add that our non-U-Pack residential delivery shipments were flat compared to last year. And then just as a reminder, we don't give guidance on expectations going forward.

Okay. The next question was about e-commerce. How much of ArcBest current freight would be classified as e-commerce related? And how much of the total corporate revenue is with Amazon? Judy, you want to take that one?

Sure. It's difficult to determine a specific percentage of our business that is purely e-commerce, and that's because of the omnichannel nature of retail. But how -- we are well-positioned to address these customers that need multiple solutions, to address their complex supply chain challenges. So that's a really good thing. We know we have a number of e-commerce-influenced accounts that are growing, and we have a substantial presence with retail, which is really increasingly influenced by e-commerce. The level of e-commerce business has grown to over $500 billion and it's been growing at about 15% on an annual basis for a few years now. So we increasingly anticipate that it will impact our business. We have several examples of customers in our customer base that are digitally born companies that we do business with, and some of them are handled through our managed solutions group, and the customer satisfaction with those customers is high. With respect to your question about Amazon, no single customer accounted for more than 3% of our consolidated revenues. And our 10 largest customers on a combined basis accounted for approximately 11% of our consolidated revenues. I think that gives you some perspective and otherwise, we really don't comment on specific customer business.

Okay. We were asked if expedite shipments must start to improve in order to directionally improve revenue at ArcBest moving forward? How much of ArcBest total revenue is derived from the expedite business?

It's clear that expedite is a significant contributor to our Asset-Light business and it did have an impact on the quarter's results. The current demand environment doesn't result in as much true expedite business. But with that being the case, we're still able to utilize our capacity resources in positive ways. The way that we've been utilizing them, that's outside of that traditional expedite business, is to serve truckload and dedicated needs of our customers. Expedite is about 35% to 40% of our Asset-Light revenue and even a greater percentage our net revenue. But we believe we've positioned our company to serve our customers regardless of the environment, utilizing a number of solutions, including managed solutions and truckload solutions as well as our dedicated offering; and when you combine those offerings with what we have when they need is there for the ground expedite business, we have a good set of solutions regardless of the customer need or incorporating any customer need.

Okay. Jack and Todd asked for an update on 2019 net CapEx, breakout by rolling stock, term loan and IT. And what color, if any, can we provide on 2020 CapEx?

David, I'll take that. And just a reminder, we haven't updated our 2019 CapEx guidance from what we've previously provided which was a range of $170 million to $180 million. Although now we currently expect to finish probably in the lower end of that range. And $90 million of that CapEx guidance was expected to replace revenue equipment for our Asset-Based operations. And then the increase that we are having in 2019 is primarily associated with real estate projects, some dock equipment, including forklifts, technology investment. And as we typically do, we'll provide an estimate for our 2020 CapEx in our fourth quarter earnings call.

Okay. The next question is from Jason Seidl of Cowen and Todd, were about Asset-Based cost management. Are the city pickup dock handling and final shipment delivery costs that were called out as elevated this quarter expected to remain higher for the rest of the year? What is your ability to adjust costs to a softer-volume environment in the second half of 2019 and in 2020? Judy?

Yes, I mentioned in my earlier comments that our Asset-Based labor costs were somewhat elevated relative to business levels, and some of that was because of the tight labor market. We've brought on some additional labor resources in order to preserve service levels for our customers, and we needed to do that a little bit earlier again because of this environment. We also experienced weight per shipment decline during the second quarter. But at the same time, the average number of pieces for LTL shipment increased. The combination of these changing shipment profile metrics really impact productivity, which contributed to the higher costs we referenced. But we continue to evaluate the proper balance between these labor resources and serving our customers in order to achieve a more cost-effective or efficient combination. We want to benefit our customers in terms of service, but we also know that we have to effectively manage these costs. Some of the actions that we've taken, and we'll continue to evaluate our reduction of overtime. We also are making some changes to scheduling so that our labor hours are better matched to shipment levels but I do want to point out that we had some cost improvements in some variable cost areas, our rents and purchased transportation; reductions that you see when you look at the earnings release are due to some reduced rail costs, city cartage and rentals. And again, those are all more variable costs that we can flex up or down as we need them, depending on the environment.

Okay. Jason asked, what are your expectations for peak season in 2019? And Dave asked, what are your customers saying about the second half of 2019 and the demand? Judy, what about that one?

We're pretty -- are adequately staffed for a seasonal uptick. But we are continuing to optimize and match resources to business levels, as I just described. We feel like with our Asset-Based and Asset-Light solutions, that we really are uniquely positioned to serve our customers' peak season needs. With respect to our customers, we feel good about the momentum we're currently seeing within our existing customer base. Our largest active accounts continue to grow with us, albeit at a slower pace in 2019 when you compare it to last year. We are seeing some organic growth within our account base through the services or solutions that they are using. And we continue to see some of our largest accounts wanting to work with us to become more efficient. Many of our largest accounts have asked us to bring stability to their supply chains because they are really feeling an uncertain freight environment, an uncertain environment with respect to their supply chain planning. And it really presents a great opportunity for us with our managed solutions and other solutions to come in and help them work through that. And so I think our customers maybe are somewhat like us in that as we look forward to the second half, there is a level of uncertainty as to the environment that we'll face. But we feel like having these good, close conversations with them really benefits us in terms of what we'll experience and it benefits them in terms of the solutions that they can tap into, really kind of regardless of the environment.

Can you provide additional detail on technology investments? Are costs expected to remain elevated in 2020? And when would you expect to see efficiency benefits from these investments?

Historically, we've invested in a number of technology initiatives. For example, improvements in our city operations, our work to increase awareness of our customers, multiple logistics needs through a single view from us, and then also to enhance our website capabilities for more direct access to our solution. So those are kind of the few examples of how we invest in our business to promote growth and to optimize our costs. The $8 million of additional costs that we point out in 2019 for the Asset-Based business are over and above kind of our normal technology spend, and those are related to developmental technologies and processes that we believe will help improve operations and the customer experience. These investments that we highlight there reflect the fact that shippers are expecting increasingly faster delivery times and greater shipment visibility and cost-effective solutions. So this work involves some facility modifications, some equipment alterations, some software development and modification; and other costs to facilitate these testing activities. The incremental costs this year are necessary in order to expand our live testing and the feedback and the ongoing developments that's involved in that. So if successful, we expect there would be some future benefits, for sure; looking maybe late 2020 and into 2021 from the broader application of these initiatives in our business. But because it's still in the early stages, there's not much more detail to provide at this time until we do more testing and have time to analyze those results.

Okay. Regarding network capacity, Todd asked about where it is currently, and if we have any plans to add or close service centers? Dave Ross also wondered what our LTL network will look like in 5 years?

Yes, I understand the questions. And for our Asset-Based business, we have available capacity in the system -- or at the system level. But it's always important to remember that some locations have more [indiscernible] pressure than others. We have an ongoing process of evaluating our network for its appropriateness relative to the business volumes, and that is going to be relative to what's happening in certain or in different geographic regions of the country. So we continue to do that in this lower-freight environment, as Judy talked about managing those costs. But the decisions that we make around this capacity are really long term in nature. So we've reacted to changes in shipment levels over longer periods of time but haven't significantly changed our number of facilities in a few years. Personnel can always be a limiting factor or can be a limiting factor, but we know we can handle probably at least 10% more business. In summary, I would say that no significant changes are in the works at this time. However, we are constantly looking for ways to improve the efficiency and reliability in the network. And as a result, the network will continue to evolve as needed over the next 5 years to meet our customers' needs.

Okay, we've got a question about whether there was any update from Washington, D.C. on multiemployer pension reform. Judy, you want to take that one?

Sure. Thanks on the number of conversations that we've had with other interested parties, after passing in the house, we believe the likelihood that the Butch Lewis Act will be passed in the Senate is low. We're continuing to work with those other interested parties to explore both the Butch Lewis approach and alternative approaches to address the impending insolvency of many of these pension plans. And we certainly remain hopeful that some solution will be found to address this problem. But we do stay close to these issues, we stay involved in the process and we'll continue to provide updates as we have them.

While we were asked to discuss our current thoughts on acquisitions, also on this topic, Dave asked about M&A opportunities in a soft market. Are they at more attractive valuations?

We continue to see a good number of deals come across our desk this year and we're actively reviewing them, as we have been for the last several years. We're interested in companies that bring technology advancements that would positively impact our customers' experience or the operational efficiencies that we hope to gain as we've been discussing already on this call. Certainly, the strength of the management team and the cultural fit are really important factors in advancing our interest on any company that we would evaluate for acquisition. There really haven't been a lot of completed transactions this year, and the valuations don't seem to have moved much from where they've been over the last, say, year or so. So David, I think those are the comments related to those questions.

Okay. What drove shipments turning negative? Given your comments in the press release that you expect a continuation of current trends in the second half, should we expect negative year-over-year shipment growth for the balance of 2019? Judy?

Well, available truckload capacity in the current environment contributed to the reduction in shipment account that we experienced. Also, the manufacturing and industrial customer business is weaker and that's really reflective of the inventory-to-sales ratio trend that we've seen this year. History would tell you that the trend of the manufacturing TMI leads our business by about 4 to 6 months and it's been at a steady decline in the first half of this year. Still in a place of growth, but lesser growth short from where things started in the year. And so that will have an impact as well. Just a reminder, we do have increasingly tougher comparisons for LTL tonnage and shipments as we move toward the end of 2019.

Okay. Judy, our final questions are about the current demand environment. What are you seeing out there? Are any end markets particularly strong or weak?

Well, we've experienced a growth trend in construction and housing in 2017 and 2018, but that was on the heels of some weather events, and we're not seeing as much of that now. We are seeing new home sale flowing, and we haven't seen those -- again, those weather events that we saw in the last few years. I am encouraged about the overall unemployment rate being near historic lows, and that really plays into a consumption level that remains strong. We've been talking on this call already about e-commerce and retailers and retail vendors. They are looking for ways to increase velocity and improve transparency to the end-user. And we're well positioned within our solutions to address these trends. The larger retailers are shrinking their delivery windows with tight or acceptable compliance standards, and other retailers are paying close attention and will likely follow suit. So those trends are going on within these larger retailers. We continue to hear chatter regarding vendor compliance and delivery windows. But as I discussed in my prepared comments, we've recently announced the launch of Retail+ to respond to these retail delivery trends that so many of our customers are having to deal with. And we're really encouraged by the positive customer response that we've received related to this innovative solution. The development of our Retail+ solution is really an example of the work that we do with our customers. We are in those relationships where we can co-create, we can work on these most difficult challenges and develop solutions. And in this case, it involves technology and process, a lot of testing, and making sure things are really moving along to meet the needs of our retail customers. And as I mentioned earlier, we've seen some really good results in this area. And again, I'd just call this out as an example of the type of work that we can do with our customers and how we positioned our company with the solution set to really have these conversations.

Right. Well, that's all the questions that we've received, and we appreciate everyone that submitted them. We thank you for joining us this morning, and we appreciate your interest in ArcBest. This concludes our call.

That does conclude the conference call for today. We thank you for your participation, and ask that you please disconnect your line.